Ray Comfort Says What Needs to Be Said

Are we all here? If so, perhaps some of the excitement about last night’s blood moon was overblown. John Hagee said that God was literally screaming at the world. Maybe he can get God to scream a little louder.

Let’s return to Prophet Ray Comfort’s Top Ten list of clues that “the end of the age is happening now,” as he puts it. We’ve explored the first half here. Let’s finish up to see if Armageddon really is around the corner.

Ray’s Bible verse #6:

For [although] they hold a form of piety (true religion), they deny and reject and are strangers to the power of it [their conduct belies the genuineness of their profession]. (2 Timothy 3:5, Amplified Version)

Fortunately, we have Ray to tell us that this means that religious hypocrisy will be prevalent. He illustrates this by interviewing people on the street who claim to be Christians but who attend R-rated movies and have premarital sex. This is hardly a statistically sound study showing that hypocrisy within Christians worldwide is markedly greater now than it was in the past. (I’m beginning to sense that scientific rigor isn’t one of his goals.)

In the last days scoffers will come …. But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. (2 Peter 3:3, 5–6)

So in the last days, people will deny that God created everything and flooded the world.

Ever the evolution denier, Ray scratches his head trying to figure out the logic behind panspermia. He interviews people who also don’t understand it to make his point. (No, I don’t see how this is relevant, either.)

Ray asks, “Do you think 70% of the earth being covered with water is a good clue that there was a worldwide flood?” Nope. The water likely came from comets, the earth may have been seeded with the components needed for abiogenesis from planets with different initial conditions than earth, and there is no evidence of a worldwide flood.

Next, Ray defends the plausibility of the Noah story. He says that the ark was enormous and that only representatives of biological families were taken on board, not species. (I’ve written about the many problems with taking the Noah story seriously here.)

Ray is right that people reject the ridiculous Flood story, and they’ve been doing so ever since science provided an alternative. I wonder, though, if gullible acceptance of Bible stories is more prevalent in recent decades with the success of fundamentalist Christianity. Ray’s concern on this point may be unfounded.

People will faint from terror, apprehensive of what is coming on the world, for the heavenly bodies will be shaken. (Luke 21:26)

In this long description of how the end will unfold, Jesus says six verses later, “This generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.”

Didn’t happen. Apologists have tried to reinterpret this to avoid the embarrassing fact that the Son of Man was wrong, but their attempts are themselves embarrassing. The real test is to imagine Jesus actually saying this and then asking how his followers would have interpreted it—obviously, that the end would come within a few decades.

Awkward.

… in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” (2 Peter 3:3–4)

Good question! Where is this imminent “coming” he promised 2000 years ago? Of course there are scoffers. Given the Bible’s poor track record, what else would you expect?

The rest of this chapter clumsily tries to rationalize away the problem. You see, God has a different sense of time than we do. And isn’t it handy that the end has been delayed since it allows more people to be saved? Still, you must be ready! It could come at any minute!

As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. (Matthew 24:37–39)

Ray takes this as license to give his famous Ten Commandments test. He asks people if they’ve ever stolen something (even once), ever lied (even once), and so on. He concludes by declaring that, by their own admission, each person is a lying, thieving, blasphemous adulterer at heart. The next logical step, apparently, is to assume God’s existence and ask these sinners how God should treat them on Judgment Day.

Sorry, Ray. The Ten Commandments test assumes what you’re trying (not very successfully) to prove. Your Top Ten list of Signs of the End is no better.

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. — Seneca the Younger

“Arrive at a conclusion, therefore, that there is nothing beyond this Universe. Give precedence to that which meets the eye and turn your back on what is beyond our knowledge.”

“the embarrassing fact that the Son of Man was wrong” About as embarrassing as Aragorn admitting he’s a bastard from a peasant when meeting Frodo in Bree. So we have an author supposed to be smart enough to create a fictional character, but also stupid enough to include a prophecy that hadn’t come true. Makes about as much sense as Comfort’s Ark of Noah. Unless the scatterbrained character actually made that prophecy, of course.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

As with Daniel, the gospels are like an op-ed piece that is important and relevant for a particular community and just in that time but is laughably misplaced when applied 2 millennia later in a foreign culture.

MNb

Of course. That raises the question: do such christians really think we cannot do any better than those people 2000 years ago? Do they want to stick to an outdated worldview, despite everything smart people like Franciscus of Assisi, Spinoza, Bentham and many others have done and written since then?

Jim

Yes they do. Consider an uneducated person. They have two paths to knowledge. They can spend years and large sums of money getting an education. Or they can read the Bible and be an expert on every subject overnight. It is very tempting to take the Bible approach. Then someone who barely finnished grammar school can set himself up as intellectually equal to a scientist who spent 20 years in school.

Kodie

So we have an author supposed to be smart enough to create a fictional character, but also stupid enough to include a prophecy that hadn’t come true.

I was thinking that too. A few generations had passed before someone wrote this all down and still included it in the book.

Itarion

I have to say this, though: all prophecies aside, it was really quite beautiful. I’ll also share what a buddy of mine said, “You are watching a thousand sunsets at once. All the sunsets and sunrises happening across this world right now are being projected onto the moon for you to see.”

wtfwjtd

“As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away..”

Ahem. Didn’t it take Noah and his sons something like 120 years to build that monstrosity, right out in the open? Does this mean we’ll get a 120-year heads up on the date of the coming of the Son of Man?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

I don’t think the Bible actually gives a timespan for the build process.

wtfwjtd

My bad, I must have recalled something from my fundie upbringing. You’d think it’d take a few years anyway–so that ought to be plenty of time for a heads-up, I would think, and not very surprising.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

You’re in good company for remembering that, but it doesn’t actually say that. I think the confusion comes from the few verses just before the Noah story that say that God changed Man’s maximum lifespan to 120 years (but for some reason, that didn’t stop a 600-yo Noah from getting on the ark and then living another 300+ years afterwards.

Greg G.

Some interpret Genesis 6:3 to mean that humans would live another 120 years but no more, because of ye Olde Floode.

Kodie

Sounds like he’s pretty much admitting evolution is true, which is sort of good news? I mean, he doesn’t know what the hell he’s talking about, but I think allowing for micro-evolution, as they put it, might be considered a concession. They are allowing that the ark isn’t big enough for all the species of animals, and they are allowing that “kinds” of animals can break up into a variety of species. To give it a prophesy angle, just because some dummy like Ray Comfort can convince some other dummies that he’s wise and logical doesn’t mean this kind of thinking is going to last forever. Their special kind of stupid is not hereditary. They have built up some outrageous bunk in an effort to oppose science that contradicts the bible in schools, and they lost. The more I think of it, the more this seems like a fad. In 100 years, they’ll be whining about something else, what’s left of them.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

You would think that … but I think you’d be wrong. Evolution is the devil’s handiwork, after all. I don’t remember their song and dance, but I think Ray would reject speciation as well as say that the families on the ark turned into the millions of species we see today.

Good point about Creationism being a fad. You might well be right.

wtfwjtd

My daughter tells me that YEC is only wildly popular in the US, it’s not nearly as popular in the rest of the industrialized world.

Ozark

Eh…. It’s a “niche market” and a general marker for “capacity for self delusion”

It seems that religiosity in the US is falling into a pattern of polarization.

Gone are the liberal Christians, the “Christmas and Easter Methodists”, people are sorting increasingly into agnosticism, atheism and noncommittal “spirituality” vs. the unabashed drinkers of Kool Aid.

Religiosity would have had better long term survivability had it doubled down on moderate, liberal, abstract interpretations of Christianity, in my opinion. Polarization between rational thinkers and wholesale “swallowers of the WOO” is only going to end one way in the era of information and communication.

wtfwjtd

Yes, the words “liberal” and “Christianity” are like mixing oil and water these days, sadly enough.

“Polarization between rational thinkers and wholesale “swallowers of the WOO” is only going to end one way in the era of information and communication.”

What a comforting thought!

Kodie

I think most people here are still liberal or conservative Christians, conservative meaning, conservative or puritanical values, but are not obsessed with politics or any of the issues. They have opinions they know better than to voice, they still think there’s a god, and there are enough of them they don’t need to talk about it unless something comes up.

These are the least likely to lose their religion, because I don’t think they ever question it or study it. They still hate atheists and carry with them the same old bigoted ideas they learned as a child, combined with taking offense to literally anyone disturbing their status quo privilege by talking. In contrast to the frightened superstitious Christians who are warned not to become one of those bitter, empty atheists who will surely go to hell, these other Christians just have a knee-jerk reaction and almost cling to their beliefs because atheists are just jerks who ruin their flow, why would they consider the merits of the arguments, shut up already, jeez! Etc. They don’t seem to pay enough attention to what’s going on in the world with their fellow Christians, they just know what team they’re on.

“Seekers” are other people – I would suggest among the middle-road apathetic Christians are some very concerned folks who are not getting their needs met because that kind of Christianity just blends in, it feels meaningless. They are very curious about some exotic beliefs, because exotic=authentic. The internet helps a lot of white people in the US find cultures and those cultural beliefs that seem more deep to them without the awkward conversations they’d have if they tried to find out from someone they know. I have never in my life been proselytized by someone of another religion than Christianity.

Most people do not mention their religion at all, and that may be because of the old etiquette where you don’t talk about religion or politics that I grew up with. I only know one other atheist in my real life, although possibly more who just never bring it up. I have experienced it’s not yet safe to mention among my circles, both because they’re very likely Christians and intolerant of the exaggerated militancy they expect, and because it would be weird to bring it up when nobody else is bringing it up. When someone offhand mentions they can’t come to something because they have to go to church, is not the time to say well I’m an atheist, have fun at church, but I’ll be there, we’ll miss you.

Ozark

I’ll spill the beans a bit here and let you in on a dirty little secret : I’m a Psychiatrist.

I’m a high volume Psychiatrist right in the middle of the Bible belt, and as such, I routinely ask a greater number of people about religious beliefs and affiliations and get franker answers than Gallup could hope to do.

Here’s the rub : Non-literalist viewpoints appear to me to be the norm these days. More than individuals would like to admit, for whatever reasons you may like to hypothesize.

I hear regular church attenders confess near frank disbelief fairly regularly. I’m routinely shocked by patients with low educational levels and double digit IQ’s who point out to me the contradictions they find in religion that causes them not to believe.

My conclusion is the social taboo against Atheism is still quite large and masks the public opinion polling results and reticence to admit these positions in polite conversation. You’d be surprised the number of redneck, gun-toting, Republican voting, conservative working class individuals who confess religious doubt or Agnosticism but wouldn’t readily admit it. I see a larger cross-section (no pun intended) than just about anyone, I’ve been doing this for about 15 years, and believe me, the recent polling results showing a rise in “disbelief” are no blip on the radar.

Kodie

It would be especially strong there. I can only talk about my own experience, living my full life so far in the liberal Northeast, and currently in Boston, which is pretty diverse.

My short answer to you is that you have a self-selected sample of people who portray themselves as Christians to the outside world but do not have at least the personal stigma to visit a psychiatrist. Do they come to you secretly or in the support of their family?

Does their lack of faith cause their psychic pain or is that just something that comes up in an intake interview, either voluntarily or in answer to a question. As someone who is a patient, sometimes I say something that is just part of a story, but the counselor picks up on a little thread and leads me to nowhere. As an American pretty-much-closeted atheist, I imagine a lot of people attributing all my problems or personal flaws to a lack of god, which is why I don’t feel safe bringing it up in therapy. I have to wonder, where you live, why they trust you not to steer them back to the lord or make their problems a consequence of godlessness (which is not the same as the troubles of going through a deconversion).

Ozark

Nah, my sample is simply so broad, so many patients over so many years that I can’t hope but conclude that what I am seeing is a very clear trend.

I did my residency at an Ivy League facility in the Northeast, and my gut feeling is that I’m not sensing any difference in religiosity in the buckle of the mid-south bible belt (if not a greater trend of non-theism) than I did in a nominally Catholic upper middle class New England community.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

That’s great to hear. You’re able to get behind some of the difficulties of asking people questions to which they perceive there to be a correct answer (“Are you religious?” or “Do you go to church?” etc.).

MNb

That’s great to hear indeed – it means that the polls about atheism are bound to explode. It only takes one sheep to start ….

Pofarmer

Ozark, can I assume that you are in MO or AR? I am in MO myself.

Ozark

You may grit your teeth to know I am actually in Tulsa – which is merely a hilly area in a river valley at the edge of the Ozark plateau –

which in itself is not a mountain area created by plate tectonics but rather the illusion of mountains created by millions of years of erosion of a highland plateau, which of course we all know is a lie becuz bible and stuff

Rather my roots are in SE Oklahoma, but nobody understands the handle “Oauchita” – but that is another matter. Those are plate tectonic generated mountains that have eroded from the size of the Himalayas to comparable in appearance to the Ozarks due to an even longer process of erosion.

But of course that is also false due to – you know – becuz bible and stuff

Pofarmer

I was at the NIPER lab at Bartelsville, OK. Some of the roughest, most cut up country I have ever seen.

Pofarmer

“Religiosity would have had better long term survivability had it doubled down on moderate, liberal, abstract interpretations of Christianity, in my opinion.”

It’s interesting that you say that. I probably could have gone on indefinitely as a non-denominational Methyterian or what not. It was seeing the fundy/crazy side of Catholicism(and there is one) that got me to questioning and searching and it was long slide downhill. My wife and I have seen a couple counselors, and this last one is a “God Loves us all very much and is all around us” type of Christian. I think that she thinks that that is what everybody believes, but my wife believes that the wafer turns into flesh and the wine turns into blood and that Mary is in Heaven praying to Jesus for our sins and the Saints are there too, continually praying for us. The problem is, it seems to me, that sometimes, these “moderate, God is love” Christians, feed the fundamentalists almost without realizing it. So when she says “Well, you just go on trying to be the best Catholic you can be, and you just go on studying and learning about these other things.” I don’t think she realizes that she is creating a wider gulf between two people, because the rational position and the fundamentalist position are just too polarly opposed.

Christianity really lost me about 15 years ago here in the US when it became mostly about partisan politics and little else. They can indulge in their fantasies all they want,as long as they don’t try and force them on the rest of us. That’s where the real problem is.

MNb

Absolutely. This public park, named after a famous Dutch atheist and socialist, is build on the site of a former church:

Nobody cares. So Dutch atheists don’t have to care if christians here or there want a cross on a War Memorial or something. For an outsider like me it’s obvious that way too many American christians refuse to accept the idea of mutual respect: give in a little here, get back a little there.

wtfwjtd

Wow, that must be nice! Maybe one day the US will be as advanced as that.

Kodie

By allowing micro-evolution, they are inching their way reluctantly toward acceptance, since they know they will get nowhere rejecting it outright. Evolution happens at that micro scale. It is evolution. What they don’t recognize is the scope of time or abiogenesis. No way we all crawled up from a single-celled organism over millions of years, so much more likely god up in the sky twirled his finger and pointed and became humans AND monkey, zebras and hippos… did you ever notice most of the animals lined up to get on the ark are what we in North America would consider exotic? Giraffes and tigers and elephants and camels, no squirrels or cows or dogs or horses or sheep.

As I said before when you were covering Noah, what did god need with a family and all these animals to repopulate the earth? GOD, the guy who can just form people from dirt and thoughts and breath and ribs, made it a point not to start completely over but to save a particular man and, because that man had a family already, them too. They accept evolution because they understand how breeding works. They know when you get a man and a woman to fuck, and it makes a baby, it’s not some whole new miraculous creature, but a combination of their DNA. The racists ones who don’t like it when races mix, they understand things like “percents”, they understand when it matters to them what a black person in the family tree does to affect white purity. They are excited about genealogy. They have big extended families. I suppose they think if the parents match close enough to the ideal factor of “whiteness” they aren’t in danger of becoming another race or creature altogether. For fuck’s sake, a lot of them think black people are another species, or rationalized it so when slavery was legal and popular.

Beyond that, a lot of them are farmers, know farmers, and/or come from a long line of fucking goddamned farmers. They know about husbandry. They know intimate calculated details about husbandry and breeding better stock.

But in the beginning, god made a cow. He just *zap* “there is your cow.” You won’t know what to do with it for a few thousand years, but make sure you save one with horns and one with udders on that boat, and then when you land and figure out what to do with cows, you will still think animals get their coat patterns from visually similar stimuli, like looking at sticks to get striped. Eventually you will get the hang of this genetics stuff and figure out how to build a better cow than I.

What else can expect from the Banana Man? The really interesting question is why people take this fruitcake seriously.

Kodie

From YouTube:

I’m a Christian and I believe in speciation. But that has nothing to do with evolution.

You separate a population and get some random mutation to the point where they can’t breed or you hybridize a population.

That’s not evolution. =/

The problem seems to occur when they are so opposed to evolution that they don’t know what evolution is. They are conceding that observable or historical speciation has occurred because they cannot ignore it or deny it. They don’t want to look like dummies who don’t know anything, like if you said it’s raining because it was raining, they’re not going to say it’s a bright, sunny day, they’re going to say, but this isn’t rain, this is… I mean, well, obviously, the moisture in the atmosphere condenses into clouds which then release that moisture, which due to gravity, comes back down to earth, but that’s not rain. This isn’t rain, it’s not raining. Rain is not real.

Of course I am making a cartoon out of this guy having any sort of actual knowledge, because everyone knows rain comes from clouds, and clouds come from god. He makes clouds, fills them up like a waterbed, with a hose, and delivers them to certain areas, more often for rainy places like the Amazon, London, and Seattle, and less often for places like Southern California, Las Vegas, and the Sahara Desert. It’s just the way he wants it, who are we to complain. Most of us get some rain sometimes, but that’s only because it helps flowers to grow. Nobody else likes rain, but we put up with it because of the flowers.

MNb

“Of course I am making a cartoon out of this guy” No, you aren’t. Ray comfort has turned himself into a walking cartoon. And he is far from the only one. My personal favourite is David Rives, who I lovingly call the Good Reverend:

I’m sure someone here has pointed out the irony involved when a young Earth Creationist rationalizes Noah’s Ark by saying only “Family” levels of animals were contained in the Ark.

This, of course, is endorsing evolution on a scale of rapidity exponentially greater than any sane Biologist ever would.

Just have to savor that one…

Greg G.

They believe in hyperevolution that stops just as quickly.

JT Rager

Maybe evolution happened the generation directly after the flood, where each pair gave birth to entire new species once leaving the ark out of friskiness (1,000s-10,000s in the case of bugs and germs!)

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

Likelier: 90% of the species got eaten by the other 10% since there was no food except year-old, waterlogged carcasses.

Greg G.

When the waters receded, the oceans needed to be depopulated so the animal lived on fish, mussels, and seaweed. Koalas ate eucalyptus kelp.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

Oh, eucalyptus kelp! I hadn’t thought of that for the koalas.

When you let God supply the words, you speak great wisdom.

Greg G.

The water canopy protected earth from cosmic rays which damage DNA. With that gone, the ability to evolve rapidly and interbreed degraded quickly. This is obvious. Where did rhinocerous beetles come from? They prove beetles and rhinos could interbreed. [/snark]

Rick

The water likely came from comets, the earth may have been seeded with the components needed for abiogenesis from planets with different initial conditions than earth, and there is no evidence of a worldwide flood.

Can we take it to mean that these are clues as to what you do believe instead of the usual refutation of what you don’t? if so, perhaps you can write some positive pieces in favor of what you actually believe and we can debate those positions.

MNb

Try some science books. I am pretty sure BobS “believes” in Newton’s Laws, Relativity and Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, to name a few things I happen to be familiar with.

Rick

I’m very happy for him. But I’m more interested in whether he believes in water on earth from comets, directed panspermia (or undirected panspermia, also called abiogenesis) and no evidence for a worldwide flood. Those were the topics his quoted passage dealt with.

MNb

Same answer: I am pretty sure BobS “believes” what science has to say about these topics.

Panspermia doesn’t solve the problem of abiogenesis, but it expands the initial conditions.

Suppose the early earth could never have completed one of the steps that preceded abiogenesis. OK–maybe that material came from an asteroid from another planet that did have the conditions to enable that step.

MNb

That’s still speculation without empirical evidence. There is no reason to reject it a priori (I don’t), but it’s no reason to accept it either. Plus my point holds: we’ll have to find that other planet (OK, we can allow ourselves some leeway), the asteroid (less leeway here) and the scenario that describes how that other planet enabled that step indeed (no leeway at all). Finally there is the annoying problem that based on a sample of 1 (the Earth) we have no way to find out what those conditions for abiogenesis actually are. For the time being I think panspermia not exactly refuted, but rather unpromising.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

Just so long as you don’t make the mistake that Ben Stein made in “Expelled,” lampooning panspermia because it simply moves the problem.

We have meteorites that we think came from Mars. We’ve found interesting organic compounds in comets. No one will find the particular meteorite/comet that infected the earth with microbes (or prebiotic matter), if that is indeed what happened, but I think we have evidence that does tentatively support this broadening of the initial conditions.

Rick

Does that mean you are in agreement that there is not sufficient time, nor is there sufficient evidence that evolutionary naturalism solves the problem of life on Earth?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

No. I can’t imagine how anyone could have drawn that conclusion from that comment, but I apologize for any confusion I might have added to the conversation.

Rick

Agreed.

Nemo

I would highly recommend Paul Chartley’s video on Youtube about Ray Comfort’s movie. A few weeks before Ray even released it, Paul made 10 specific predictions about Ray’s movie, all of which came true. One of the predictions would be that it would be mostly man on the street interviews. Another was that there would be Nazis.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

“Expelled” actually had footage of Nazi or Soviet troops (the obvious consequence of evolution, I guess).

Greg G.

Paul Chartley or Paul C. Hartley? I recall that it was one and then learned it was the other. Now I forget which idea came first.

Nemo

I’m not sure to be honest. That’s the name of the Youtube channel, though.

SparklingMoon

As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. (Matthew 24:37–39) ……………………………………………………………………………………….. There are two kind of descriptions with the name of Noah in Holy Scriptures. One description is about a prophet who was appointed for the people of a particular area that was amid high mountains. The people of this prophet Noah used to oppose him therefore had a punishment of flood that destroyed them completely and all sources of life around that area. Noah had prepared a boat according to the instructions of God Almighty that saved the righteous people who entered this boat and other sources of their survival like some animals and birds of that area. The next generation of human beings had been continued in that area by those righteous people. Abraham and many other prophet that are described in the Bible and the Quran are from the generation of these righteous people of that boat.

The other descriptions with the name of Noah about a whole earthly destruction are about an other incident that belong to the end time of human civilization.This second destruction is usually confused or mixed with the incident of that Noah who was sent only for a particular area. It is a tradition of God Almighty that he never punished his people without warning.He always send a prophet first to inform his people about the right path and gives them enough time to think about it and then destroys those people who try to become a hindrance between his message and His people. The Prophet Noah, who had appeared in a valley of mountains for a particular people, was neither a prophet with a universal message nor had sources in his time that his voice could reach to the people of the whole earth. When that prophet Noah was neither opposed by all people of the earth nor all people had heard his message of God then it is wrong to consider that God had destroyed people of the whole earth without any reason.

Actually,there is a seven thousand years cycle of human civilization( according to Holy Scriptures) and it repeats itself on earth.This recent time is the beginning of the seventh thousand of this cycle and this time has a close relation to that universal destruction of earth.The person who is appointed as a prophet of this time is a prophet with a universal message for all people of the earth as he has been given sources at this time that his message can reach in the corners of the whole earth.He is symbolically called Noah also in some religious books to warn people. His teachings will be an ark ,for people of this seventh thousand,to save themselves from drowning the flood of delusion. The constant deny of his teachings can bring a universal punishment. The people who would not save themselves by the Boat of this Noah of the time that he has prepare for their righteousness then they will become a part of this big earthly destruction of civilization.The generations of those people will only continue on earth after this destruction who will be inside the boat of righteousness that has been prepared by the Noah of this end time.

Rudy R

Your god sure likes to play around with numbers.

SparklingMoon

It is a prevailed law of God in nature also that His creations reach to its measured perfection or goal step by step in different stages and mostly in seven stages. Secondly,the scriptures of all the Prophets.. show that from Adam to the end,God has ordained the age of the world to be seven thousand years,with a thousand year periods both for light and for darkness. In other words,there is a period for righteousness to prevail and a period in which evil and misguidance reign supreme. According to the Divine scriptures, both these epochs are divided into periods of one thousand years each.The first of these periods was dominated by guidance during which there was no sign of idol worship. This was followed by another period,also lasting a thousand years, in which all kinds of idol-worship took root and Shirk (considering worldly sources like a God) became rampant and spread in every land. In the third millennium, the foundation of Tauhid ( unity) was laid afresh and it spread in the world as far as God willed.Then, during the fourth millennium, darkness reappeared;( the Israelites went astray…)Then came the fifth millennium, which was the age of guidance.The advent of Prophet of Islam took place in this millennium.Through him God reestablished Tauhid (unity) in the world.

According to this division of periods, the sixth millennium (after 900 A.D) is the time of darkness and evil. The seventh millennium ( after 1850 C.E) in which we live is that of light and guidance … This is the last age and the final era of the world (Human civilization and dispensation have a cyclic life. The progeny of Adam also has a life cycle of seven thousand years. Only God knows how many Adams have passed away and how many have yet to come.) at the turn of which the Promised Messiah was destined to appear according to the Divine scriptures.(Lecture Sialkot)

Rudy R

Bet you are a big fan of Dan Brown.

SparklingMoon

Sorry, I never heard about this person before

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

Perhaps you’ve heard of the book he authored, The da Vinci Code.

SparklingMoon

I have looked just now on Google and found some information about him and his work The da Vinci Code. The idea selected by him is undoubtedly interesting. I personally have no knowledge about this topic of Jesus marriage or his generation. The Prophet of Islam had told the age of Jesus 120 years and this long life shows that there is more possibility that Jesus must had married and may be more than once during this long time of his age.

There are many descriptions in religious books where Jesus is called by the name of Tourist who always used to travel from one place to another. As his mission was to reform lost sheep of Israel and there were only two tribes of Israel in Jerusalem at that time of Jesus and other ten tribes were in other Asian countries like Persia Afghanistan,Tibet, Kashmir etc. for whom Jesus must had to go and search for them. It may be possible that Jesus had not married as he had to travel in search of people of Israel place to place and that sometimes becomes difficult for a devoted person to continue his journey in the existence of a family.

Plutosdad

What’s funny is that often questions like “have you ever stolen something” are used to determine if someone is truthful or not. The odds are every single person out there has stolen even if only as a child. The more of these trigger questions about “bad” behavior a person answers “no” to, the more likely they are lying and other survey answers not to be trusted. I had to take an ethics exam for a government agency that had a number of these questions interspersed with other questions of the “what would you do if” variety. So basically Ray Comfort only wants to accept testimony from the self-deluding or liars.

Bill Huningahke

There is no ‘proven fact’ of science or history that conflicts with the Bible. Notice the words ‘proven fact’ – not emotional opinions. Now please don’t leave me some foolish emotional comments copied from the many infidel websites that have already been refuted and debunked.

Each person should never forget that the empty tomb has proved beyond reasonable doubt that Christ rose from the dead after suffering and dying for his or her personal sins and for the sins of all the world. His resurrection in turn proves that He is the God of all creation, for only God can conquer death.

And that proves that all His promises and all His warnings are true and will be totally fulfilled when He comes again. Therefore, one great promise is especially fitting in conclusion. “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus |that is, openly acknowledge Jesus as your Lord|, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead |that is, that He died for all your sins and completely satisfied the terrible debt you incurred before God and thereby demonstrated the sin-debt to be completely settled by His glorious victory over death|, thou shalt be saved |that is, saved from your deserved destiny in hell and given everlasting life with Him in the new earth|” (Romans 10:9). “Blessed are all they that put their trust in him” (Psalm 2:12).

So, if you wasn’t aware that there is no ‘proven fact’ of science or history that conflicts with any statement in the Bible you are now. Of course you must realize that you are dealing with the Infallible Word of God. Sufficient evidence exists to support the biblical account, and more will likely be found, but in the final analysis, people usually do not choose to believe or disbelieve the Bible based on scientific data. The person who believes the record in the Bible, which claims to be the Infallible Word of God, will come to different conclusions than the person who rejects the Bible. Wilful denial of God’s Word (2 Peter 3:3–7) lies at the root of many disputes over historical science.

What question could I answer for you that would make you come the Lord Jesus Christ and accept Him as your Savior?

There is no any ‘proven fact’ of science or history since facts are observed. There are some observed facts that totally contradict the Bible. What’s more: the Bible contradicts itself, to begin with Gen. 1 and 2.

“Each person should never forget that the empty tomb has proved beyond reasonable doubt” Prove it. Then prove that The Resurrection follows and other explanations fail.

Bill Huningahke

Notice, all you posted was nothing more than your emotional opinions and probably copied from some infidel website since I keep seeing the same emotional outlandish comments and opinions.

Here is the Irrefutable fact thus the evidence. There is no ‘proven fact’ of science or history that conflicts with the Infallible Word of God. Want more ?

The entire Bible, though penned by multiple human writers (Deuteronomy 18:18; Jeremiah 1:9; Acts 28:25; Romans 3:2; 2 Peter 1:21) over a period of about 1400 years, is actually the unified work of one divine Author (2 Timothy 3:16–17).

So, here we have that many years ago the Bible was penned by many different people in some languages that are not even spoken today. Now if it was any other book it would be celebrated as one of the most well preseved, most factually relevant books in all of history. And any mismatch in details would simply be written off as a typo, but today a person can find on the internet lists of supposed contradictions in the Bible.

Anyone making the statement, “The Bible is full of contradictions, is either very ignorant or very mendacious.” I’m not aware of any alleged contradiction of the Bible that wasn’t answered way before the internet came out. Actually well over 200 years ago. So goes your emotional opinion. Need more?

For fifteen year, the Research Science Bureau offered a reward of one thousand dollars to anyone who could find a scientific mistake in the Bible. The reward was later raised to ten thousand dollars.

Dr. Harry Rimmer, the organization’s president, said that over the years they received thousands of letters from people seeking to collect the reward. Yet, in all but two cases, when the facts were presented concerning the true teaching of the Bible along with the correct scientific data the correspondents were satisfied that the mistakes had been their own and that the Bible was vindicated.

Dr. Rimmer said if they had ever published the letters in a book they would have called it, The Philosophy of Ignorance, because every question had risen either from ignorance of the Bible text or of the science involved.

The two cases where those seeking the reward were not satisfied with the answers given were taken to court. The court cases proved to be great opportunities. The results of both lawsuits were that even in court, the Bible was judged correct and its detractors wrong. The courts found testimonies of the Bible writers to be eyewitness accounts that could not be contradicted by people who were theorizing centuries after the events in question had taken place. Need more? Let me provide you with some more irrefutable evidence that you can easily verify…

First, I highly recommend that you start to think for yourself, instead of throwing out the same, tired old arguments that have been answered over 200 years ago. What is of particular concern is that many are prepared to regurgitate these views due to their own ignorance of scripture.

When the difficulties of scripture are approached with a docile and reverent mind, they may tend to our establishment in the faith ; but, when they are dealt with in a querulous and disingenuous manner, they may become judicial agencies in linking to caviling scepticism its appropriate penalty – even to the loss of the soul.

Many people think the Bible is just a book about religion or salvation. It is much more than this. The Bible is the History Book of the Universe and tells us the future destiny of the universe as well. It gives us an account of when time began, the main events of history, such as the entrance of sin and death into the world, the time when the whole surface of the globe was destroyed by water, the giving of different languages at the Tower of Babel, the account of the Son of God coming as a man, His death and Resurrection, and the new heavens and earth to come.

There are hundreds of minutely fulfilled prophecies in the Scriptures, most of which have been proved to have been fulfilled long after being written. A person will search in vain for one line of accurate prophecy in other religious books, but the Infallible Word of God contains many specific prophecies. Prophecies pertaining to Jesus such as His place of birth and time and manner of birth. His betrayal, manner of death, burial etc. And the detailed, specific prophecies regarding Tyre, Sidon, Samaria, Gaza and Ashkelon, Moab and Ammo, Petra and Edom, Thebes and Memphis, Nineveh, Babylon, Chorazin-Bethsaida-Capernaum, Jerusalem and Palestine. These prophecies were not ‘post-dictions’. The chance of all these things coming to pass by chance is effectively zero. Many of come to know the Lord Jesus Christ after doing some honest research about these few prophecies I’ve listed.

What men dislike, because it opposes their pride and lusts, they will not be convinced of; but it is easy to cause them to believe things they wish to be true. The theory of evolution (either cosmic or organic) has never been proved, but yet many will say it’s a fact. Most, if not all, the supposed evidences for it have, in recent years, been rejected even by many evolutionists. At the same time, evidence is multiplying that evolution on any large scale not only did not, but could not, take place.

If this response can shake you out of your complacency, then it will have been worthwhile. What question could you ask that I could answer would bring you to the Lord Jesus Christ as your Savior?

MNb

“all you posted was nothing more than your emotional opinions” This tells all about your intellectual skills and exactly zero about me. You’re silly. That one is an emotional response indeed; caused by hilarity. Ah – one of your sources is Josh McDowell. There goes your credibility out of the window. That one is an emotional response too – again caused by hilarity. As for that one link – I’m not going to wade through 500 pages of silly christian gibberish, no matter how hilarious. Tell me on what page I can find Gen. 1 and Gen. 2 discussed and I’ll look it up. Also keep your answers reasonably short, because I don’t feel like wading through your gibberish if it’s too long either. But let me help you out and get concrete.

Gen.1:11 “Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.”

Problem: there was no sunlight yet.

Gen. 1:14 “God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day,” All plants, including grass – actually all life needs sunlight to survive. Indeed science has observed that the Sun (about 5 billion of years) is older than earthly plants (about 3 billion of years). These observed facts contradict Gen. 1.

Again Gen. 1:14 “the lesser light to rule the night” Except that that lesser light often can be seen during great parts of the day and not during the entire night, as observed again and again.

Another simple example.

1 Kings 7:23 and 2 Chronicles 4:2 “a molten sea of ten cubits from brim to brim, round in compass, and five cubits the height thereof; and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about” This implies that the ratio circumference vs. diameter is 3 (in case you have forgotten: 30/10 = 3). According to mathematics it’s 3,1415 ….. Not a big deal, but the contemporary Babylonians had it better with 3,12.

“You’re silly. That one is an emotional response indeed; caused by hilarity.” I already had written it myself, Mr. Braindead. It does not follow that the previous comment “was nothing more than my emotional opinions.” Your stupidity is bottomless, isn’t it?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/ Bob Seidensticker

What are you saying? That Bill has a coherent argument that should be compelling to an atheist? He certainly thinks so, but I’m surprised that you seem to agree with him.

Asmondius

What I said is there in black and white, Bob.

Pofarmer

So, you don’t think ole Bill there is projecting just a tad?

hector_jones

Bill sure does seem awfully angry and hate-filled for a guy who decries opinions based on emotion.

HairyEyedWordBombThrower

Bill’s projecting strong enough to show a movie on the Moon!

MNb

Yes, and my reply is underneath in black and white as well, Mr. Braindead.

90Lew90

Yes, and it’s typical of you. Firing off little salvos of ambiguity, refusing then to be drawn on what they’re supposed to mean; avoiding making concrete statements on anything, but opting rather to intimate that everyone but you is wrong; and avoiding or ignoring questions about the rare concrete statements you do happen to make. Like the one about that Geneva case.

I don’t know who you think you’re fooling, but your performance here is that of an intellectually clumsy, dishonest and rather misanthropic goon who is too afraid to get into the push and shove of actual debate because he knows he’d end up being exposed as the idiot everyone here already knows he is. Egotistical too, since you’re not even identifiable here, but your “Asmondius” screen name is an extension of you, so you’re working to protect it/yourself by feigning aloofness. All you’re doing is parading the fact that not only do you have no balls, you haven’t even a leg to stand on. And you know it. How utterly pathetic.

90Lew90

Chuckle.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/ Bob Seidensticker

Too much here to respond to, but let me focus on your claim of prophecies. Search “prophecy” or “prophecies” here and you’ll find that I’ve written much on these claims. It amazes me that claims about Is. 7, Is. 53, Ps. 22, and Daniel are put forward with such confidence. When you look into them, there’s not much there.

Search this blog and ye shall find.

Bill Huningahke

Actually all of your responses are your emotional opinions. You have yet to provide any evidence that contradicts anything I’ve stated. Of course it doesn’t surprise me that you are amazed at the prophecies – it’s obvious from your emotional comments you have probably never read the Infallible Word of God and can only copy info from other infidel websites.

Do you really believe you have come up with something original that hasn’t been refuted and debunked many years ago.

I highly recommend that you start to think for yourself, instead of throwing out the same, tired old arguments that have been answered over 200 years ago. What is of particular concern is that many like your are prepared to regurgitate these views due to their own ignorance of scripture.

When the difficulties of scripture are approached with a docile and reverent mind, they may tend to our establishment in the faith ; but, when they are dealt with in a querulous and disingenuous manner, they may become judicial agencies in linking to caviling scepticism its appropriate penalty – even to the loss of the soul.

Anyone making the statement, “The Bible is full of contradictions, must be very ignorant or very mendacious.” Which are you ?

HairyEyedWordBombThrower

what is this ‘docile and reverent mind’ s**t, anyway? You’re assuming at the start what you want to prove…otherwise there’d be no reason to be docile and reverent….if there’s EVER a good reason to be docile and reverent at all.

MNb

“What question could you ask that I could answer would bring you to the Lord Jesus Christ as your Savior?” Where else than in the Middle East some 2000 years ago can I find a civilization, no matter how primitive, that knew the story of Jesus (not all the details, but say including the preaching, the claim he being the son of god, his crucifixion and the Resurrection) before that civilization got in contact with christian missionaries specifically and western civilization in general? If Jesus’ claim is correct that he is a lord, a christ and a saviour indeed that would be a piece of cake for him. It would be a total gas, wouldn’t it, if we found such a story deep in Amazonia originating from before 1500 CE or in the inlands of Papua Guinea from well before say 1900 CE. Now the other way round. Let’s see if you’re honest. What question could you ask that I could answer would bring you to the insight that there is no god?

Bill Huningahke

Notice – once again nothing more than your emotional opinions. Not even anything new. Your foolish emotional comments has been answered years ago. Talk about laughable if it wasn’t so sad that you might actually think that copy & pasting from some infidel websites gives you evidence.

Now I will answer your question since you are unable to answer mine or refuse to,

QUESTION: What question could you ask that I could answer would bring you to the insight that there is no god?’

ANSWER: Prove the Resurrection never happened.

If you had actually done any research, as you want others to think, you would already know that. I Corinthians 15 covers it in explicit detail.

Once again – just your emotional comments and opinions – no research or you would have never asked just a foolish question since it’s already covered in the Infallible Word of God. That’s why the Resurrection is so powerful – that’s why the Resurrection is the prove for all of mankind – that’s why the Resurrection tells you that you will bow before Him someday — will you bow before Him as your Savior or as your Judge .. The choice is yours …

“For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse” Romans 1:20

It’s this simple, the initiator is not the fact in argument. One has no need to explain the origin of something to prove God. I challenge you or anyone to start at the reverse position. Don’t try to show me how it started. Illustrate to me how to stop it. Stop the sun, stop gravity, stop nature, stop the wind, stop a star, stop inertia, stop energy, stop reproduction, stop logic, stop anything. Man can’t stop nuttin, not even their own stupid logic. Only the Lord Jesus Christ and a handful of guys stopped anything. Mans inability to alter any law, ever, is the clearest reality that man is not a player, explainer, or consultant in the process and for man to be talking about stuff out of his control is similar to a fly on a runaway train trying to explain how fast he can fly.

For over 1800 years, skeptics and others like your have been refuting and trying to overthrow the Bible, and yet it stands today as a solid rock…The skeptics and others like you, with all their assaults, make about as much impression on this book as a man with a hammer would on the Pyramids of Egypt.

When a French monarch proposed persecuting Christians, an elderly advisor told him, “Sir, the Church of God is an anvil that has worn out many hammers.” So the hammers of the skeptics and others like you have been pecking away at this book for ages, but the hammers are worn out, and the anvil still endures. If the Bible had not been the Word of God, men would have destroyed it long ago. Emperors and popes, kings and priests, princes and rulers have all tried their hand at it; they have all died and yet this book lives on.

God created man in His likeness. He came to earth and took on the likeness of man born of a virgin and dwelt among us. His name was Jesus. He bore our sins on the cross. He died for us. He was buried and on the 3d day He was resurrected.

Romans 10:9-13 “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

I would simply ask you now — Do you believe in Jesus Christ? Do you believe that He has died for your sins and for the sins of the world? Do you believe that He was raised from the dead on the 3rd day? If you do – then look at verse 13 again: “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

Since everybody has sinned and everyone is under the wage of sin and the penalty of sin being death — God now offers to every man and all men whosoever; the invitation to come and have this free gift of Eternal Life through Jesus Christ.

The Resurrection is the Irrefutable fact … The gospel is not church, it is not forgiveness, its no hokey church attendance and rituals. It is the death, burial and resurrection of Christ.

These websites your go to might know a lot about Bible verses but they know very little about its Author, its Originator, its Beginning and its End. Paper and ink will disappear but the Logos was before all things and after all things.

MNb

“you are unable to answer mine or refuse to,” So you’re just another christian liar. I just answered your question. Here is the copy:

Where else than in the Middle East some 2000 years ago can I find a civilization, no matter how primitive, that knew the story of Jesus (not all the details, but say including the preaching, the claim he being the son of god, his crucifixion and the Resurrection) before that civilization got in contact with christian missionaries specifically and western civilization in general? If Jesus’ claim is correct that he is a lord, a christ and a saviour indeed that would be a piece of cake for him. It would be a total gas, wouldn’t it, if we found such a story deep in Amazonia originating from before 1500 CE or in the inlands of Papua Guinea from well before say 1900 CE. This could be answered – the problem is that there is no answer. But I can provide you with another one. Your god, so you claim, is a good one. So I assume, if he exists, that he wants to save as many people from natural disasters as possible. Show me with a significant statistical correlation that the potential victims of such disasters are warned say a week before by means of a collective nightmare or something similar. This could be answered too – the problem is that there is no such significant statistical correlation.

“Prove the Resurrection never happened.” Dishonest indeed. You knew at beforehand that this question never can be answered to your satisfaction. Btw if that happened you still had the option to reconvert to another religion. So in two ways this is a dishonest request. It’s similar to “prove that Russell’s Teapot does not exist.”

Bill Huningahke

Already answered in the Infallible Word of God – don’t be afraid to read. You have already been answered numerous times before you copy & pasted it from another infidel website – oops – – you think your statement is original – not hardly … Think for yourself, but like I already stated – – already answered in the Infallible Word of God.

MNb

Yeah? Tell me – does the Bible say Jesus appeared in Amazonia or in Papua Guinea too?

“don’t be afraid to read” Oh, but I do. My favourite book is Revelations. No matter which page I pick, it’s always good for a laugh. See, the more I read the Bible the more atheistic I become.

“Think for yourself, but like I already stated – – already answered in the Infallible Word of God.” Nice contradiction, Bill. Taking over what’s assumed to be infallible is the exact opposition of thinking for yourself.

Bill Huningahke

Once again – just more emotional opinions and comments. If you had actually read like you have stated then you already know the answer, but once again you display your ignorance of the Infallible Word of God. Reminder: there is no proven fact of science or history that conflicts with any statement in the Bible.

BTW: there is no such book in the Bible called ‘Revelations’ … once again you display your ignorance of scripture … don’t know what’s in the book you read …

Perhaps the book you like reading ‘Revelations’ is about he church of evolution. Perhaps you are a Darwiniac … One who worships at the church of evolution. One who refuses to acknowledge any information that does not conform to Darwinism. One who clings to Darwinism even as the contrary evidence accumulates, because it allows them to ignore God … [and they] will not admit evolution is a crock until they have concocted a new creation myth that also excludes God. In the correct definition of the word, it is a religion; a religion funded by taxpayer dollars.

MNb

“you display your ignorance of the Infallible Word of God.” Of course. That’s why I asked you, the unemotional expert. As you don’t answer I ask again:

Tell me – does the Bible say Jesus appeared in Amazonia or in Papua Guinea too?

“there is no such book in the Bible called ‘Revelations'” Teach me again, Great Unemotional Teacher, what is the Name of the Last Book of the New Testament?

“there is no proven fact of science or history that conflicts with any statement in the Bible.” Of course not – you define proven as not conflicting with (your perhaps unemotional but highly personal interpretation of) the Bible. Anyhow I have some stuff you didn’t address underneath:

Gen.1:11 “Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.”

Problem: there was no sunlight yet. Without sunlight thre is no life possible – no grass, no tree.

Gen. 1:14 “God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day,” All plants, including grass – actually all life needs sunlight to survive. Indeed science has observed that the Sun (about 5 billion of years) is older than earthly plants (about 3 billion of years). These observed facts contradict Gen. 1.

Again Gen. 1:14 “the lesser light to rule the night” Except that that lesser light often can be seen during great parts of the day and not during the entire night, as observed again and again.

Another simple example.

1 Kings 7:23 and 2 Chronicles 4:2 “a molten sea of ten cubits from brim to brim, round in compass, and five cubits the height thereof; and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about” This implies that the ratio circumference vs. diameter is 3 (in case you have forgotten: 30/10 = 3). According to mathematics it’s 3,1415 ….. Not a big deal, but the contemporary Babylonians had it better with 3,12.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/ Bob Seidensticker

Bill’s point is that the last book is “Revelation,” not “Revelations.” Since you made a simple mistake, that proves that you have nothing of value to say and Bill wins!

MNb

Yes, that brilliant comeback of his totally silences me.

MNb

“One who worships at the church of evolution.” BWAHAHAHAHA! Tell me, do you worship at the church of gravity?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/ Bob Seidensticker

It must be fun being smart enough to decide what science is valid and what is crap. Tell us about how that feels.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/ Bob Seidensticker

Bill: You’re playing a dangerous game here with your obnoxious statements. Kinda makes you look like all you have is bluster instead of actual arguments.

Take whatever tack you want, but if you fail after doubling down like this, you’ll look pretty idiotic.

Bill Huningahke

You have yet to provide any logical arguments or evidence. Nothing more than your emotion opinions. Name calling too, but just more of your emotional opinions. Is that all your have – that’s your entire argument – – just your emotional opinions.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/ Bob Seidensticker

Ah, so it’s me with the name calling and emotional arguments. OK, got it.

If you’re determined to remain unconvinced by any argument, I’m sure you’ll succeed. God’s gotta be pleased with that.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/ Bob Seidensticker

I should just let MNb bitch-slap your silly arguments, but let me just say that, now that I’ve read your comment, you indeed have nothing but bluster here. You simply make the Christian claims with great emphasis and think that that’s an argument.

Sorry–you lose.

Bill Huningahke

Just another internet wannabe warrior. So all your evidence boils down to nothing more than your outlandish emotional opinions. There is not ‘proven fact’ of science or history that conflicts with any statement in the Bible and you say – I lose … yeah okay – if you say so with just another emotional opinion.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/ Bob Seidensticker

My “outlandish emotional opinions” are actually arguments.

Here’s how we play the game here: I make an argument (not all posts have an argument making a point), and then you tell me where a conclusion is wrong, where there are contrary opinions that I missed, and so on.

Sounds like this is a new approach for you. Give it a try.

MNb

He can’t. He is an old-timey record that got stuck. In literally every single comment of his he begins with “nothing but emotional arguments”. It’s a hollow phrase and he probably even doesn’t know himself why he uses it.

hector_jones

You’re a perfect example of why whenever I read comments from Christians I find myself humming the song “Send In The Clowns”.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/ Bob Seidensticker

Science is always provisional–though you already knew that since you’re so smart.

That’s why “proven” is never used to refer to science’s conclusions except by the ignorant.

Greg G.

There is not ‘proven fact’ of science or history that conflicts with any statement in the Bible and you say – I lose … yeah okay – if you say so with just another emotional opinion.

There is no statement in the Bible that can’t be retrofitted to mean whatever it needs to mean. For example, there are two versions of how David bought the hilltop for the Temple. He bought the land to build an altar to staunch God’s anger toward David that was being directed at the Israelite in the former of plagues, killing them by the thousands. God was mad because David took a census. One version says David was instigated to take the census by the angel of the Lord and the other says David was instigated to take the census by Satan. I have seen apologists twist those verses every which way to try to convince themselves that there is no contradiction. The best they can do is convince themselves but the contradiction remains.

If God could make a person with free will who wouldn’t sin, Jesus for example, why couldn’t he have done so with the first humans?

Please don’t project your emotional state on to me. I’m only pointing out logical inconsistencies. I’m about as emotional as Mr. Spock on this.

Bill Huningahke

The very Infallible Word of God answers your question – doesn’t get any better than that. What’s wrong – oh, let me guess — you don’t know what the Bible has to say if you can find it on some website. Am I close? If you had read my statements you already knew this, but once again you simply post your emotional opinions.

So when are you going to accept the Lord Jesus Christ as your Savior? His very word answers your question. I’ve answered your question on just how impossible it is to disprove Christianity because it stands on the Infallible, the Irrefutable Word of God.

Perhaps it’s time for you to actually start thinking for yourself instead of parroting others emotional opinions. What is it that actually keeping you from believing in the Resurrection. You already have eyewitness accounts of it.

Do you believe that man has been to the moon? Do you believe that George Washington was the 1st president of the united states? Of course you do because you believe in the witness of man – the witness of God is greater … The choice is yours

Numerous times you’ve been given irrefutable prove and you have not one single time been able to refute anything I’ve stated – that’s because it’s irrefutable …. So, what’s keeping you from accepting the Lord Jesus Christ as your Savior? He rose to give you all the proof you need to know He is God … He is the Creator … He is the Alpha & Omega … The is the King of Kings

I noticed that you didn’t comment on I Corinthians 15, so once again – you either refuse to read or do any honest research or would simply rather post your emotional opinions. Which is it …

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/ Bob Seidensticker

So you assume the Christian position at the outset? Yes, I see that, from that starting point, we can conclude that God exists. Trouble is, no thoughtful person would find that compelling.

Science will never prove that there is no supernatural. It can, however, help us see where the preponderance of evidence points.

please don’t leave me some foolish emotional comments copied from the many infidel websites that have already been refuted and debunked.

I encourage you to try to refute the arguments made at this blog.

Each person should never forget that the empty tomb has proved beyond reasonable doubt that Christ rose from the dead

What empty tomb? It’s a legend.

His resurrection in turn proves that He is the God of all creation

Are you an adult or a precocious child? Let’s be serious, please. It is a story. You don’t give Zeus the time of day. The same should be true for Yahweh.

“He died for all your sins and completely satisfied the terrible debt you incurred before God”

I am imperfect, just like God made me. Blame the creator.

you must realize that you are dealing with the Infallible Word of God

Uh … no. It’s a legend.

in the final analysis, people usually do not choose to believe or disbelieve the Bible based on scientific data.

Agreed! Why then make a logical argument if you don’t care about logical arguments?

Wilful denial of God’s Word (2 Peter 3:3–7) lies at the root of many disputes over historical science.

You think an atheist will take the council of the Bible??

As for your list of questions and answers, I didn’t look at it, but I imagine it’s like hundreds of pabulum sites that I’ve seen. We have the bar set a little higher here. If you’ve got good arguments for God’s existence, give us your best one.

Bill Huningahke

First, all you have done is simply post your emotional opinions without any logical arguments nor have your provided any evidence that contradicts anything I stated. Nothing more than your emotional opinions – nothing more and nothing less… It’s obvious you didn’t do any honest research on the evidence I provided because you wouldn’t have simply provided your emotional opinions. Read Romans 1:20 … you already know in your heart of hearts that God exists. want more evidence … simply walk outside and view the sun or view the moon or look at the stars or look at nature. It’s called creation because we have a Creator. In closing you didn’t answer my questions nor have your provided any evidence that can contradict anything I listed – your emotional opinions are not evidence even though in your mind you might think so. You’ve been provided irrefutable evidence and notice you have not been able to refute anything. Isn’t that amazing. Not really since you are dealing with the Infallible Word of God.

Bill Huningahke

Just in case you are not clear on the subject. Your emotional opinions are not evidence, also not aware of anything posted that hasn’t been refuted and debunked many years ago if it’s pertaining to evolution. Evolution isn’t science, evolution is anti-science, evolution by definition is pseudo-science.

Each person should never forget that the empty tomb has proved beyond reasonable doubt that Christ rose from the dead after suffering and dying for his or her personal sins and for the sins of all the world. His resurrection in turn proves that He is the God of all creation, for only God can conquer death.

And that proves that all His promises and all His warnings are true and will be totally fulfilled when He comes again. Therefore, one great promise is especially fitting in conclusion. “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus |that is, openly acknowledge Jesus as your Lord|, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead |that is, that He died for all your sins and completely satisfied the terrible debt you incurred before God and thereby demonstrated the sin-debt to be completely settled by His glorious victory over death|, thou shalt be saved |that is, saved from your deserved destiny in hell and given everlasting life with Him in the new earth|” (Romans 10:9). “Blessed are all they that put their trust in him” (Psalm 2:12).

I can provide you with scientific evidence for Creation and the Flood plus I can provide you with scientific evidence against evolution, but I cannot scientifically prove the Bible — ultimately, it must be accepted by faith and the Scripture tells us what sort of faith we need.

Question: What would one expect to find with a worldwide flood that killed and buried everything? Answer: One would expect to find billions of dead things buried in sedimentary rock layers laid down by water all over the world. Fact: Does anything like this exist? Of course – it is called the fossil record. Fact: There is easily enough water on this globe to cover it with a flood. If the mountains and seafloor were evened out, we have enough water to cover the earth over 1.7 miles deep Fact: Mt Everest comprises marine limestone with fossils of bottom-dwelling crinoids – showing that it was once under the sea just as the Bible says. Fact: 80 whales buried mysteriously in Chilean desert is a marine graveyard and further evidence for Noah’s Flood. Fact: Hundreds of jellyfish fossils are further proof of a worldwide flood. Fact: Fast octopus fossils reveal no evolution plus are further proof of a worldwide flood.

Isn’t it amazing that 2 Peter 3:3-7 tells us that people will deny there ever was a worldwide Flood, but we are told in scripture to never forget that God once judged this world by water and that He is coming to judge again — next time by fire.

Faith in Jesus Christ is compatible with the historical evidence that can be examined empirically. Chemical evolution has no such evidence. It would actually be a good exercise to follow Dr Craig’s explanation of the probability of Jesus’ resurrection (using Bayes’ theorem), and then plug in the data for origin of life research, and compare the probabilities. It might just indicate that you have put your faith in the wrong place.

Evolutionists fear the increasing spread of creationist information, despite their best efforts at censorship. They are desperate to counteract this information, but their efforts don’t withstand scientific scrutiny. Evolution is nothing more than a deduction from a materialistic belief system. Evolution is a philosophy/religion dressed up as ‘science’. 15 ways to refute materialistic bigotry:A point by point response to Scientific American by Jonathan Sarfati Dr Jonathan D. Sarfati Creationist Physical Chemist and Spectroscopisthttp://creation.com/15-ways-to-refute-materialistic-bigotry

Bodies don’t come back to life after being dead three days. That’s rather a big one. Stories of heros returning from the underworld were pretty common in antiquity, somthere is precedence for the story. I think you lose out of the gate.

MNb

I predict Bill’s reaction:

“Your emotional opinions are not evidence, also not aware of anything posted that hasn’t been refuted and debunked many years ago. Each person should never forget that the empty tomb has proved beyond reasonable doubt that Christ rose from the dead after suffering and dying for his or her personal sins and for the sins of all the world. His resurrection in turn proves that He is the God of all creation, for only God can conquer death. It’s obvious you didn’t do any honest research on the evidence I provided because you wouldn’t have simply provided your emotional opinions. Here is the Irrefutable fact thus the evidence. There is no ‘proven fact’ of science or history that conflicts with the Infallible Word of God. So when are you going to accept the Lord Jesus Christ as your Savior? His very word answers your question. Perhaps it’s time for you to actually start thinking for yourself instead of parroting from some infidel website.”

(Copied and pasted from four of his comments)

Bill Huningahke

Excellent but I can’t take the credit – all the credit goes to the Lord Jesus Christ – – it’s not me you are denying ….

MNb

Ah – it was LJC who did the writing for you. Apparently you are not capable of it. So much for “thinking for yourself”.

Bill Huningahke

Thank you for the compliment (Phil 2:5) … that’s why I can say with confidence that there is no proven fact of science or history that conflicts with any statement in the Bible. It’s because of the Author. Glad you are finally starting to understand. That’s why I’m constantly telling people over and over again that it’s an irrefutable fact. The author of the Bible is God – it’s the Lord Jesus Christ – that’s why it’s irrefutable. Now you are beginning to understand.

Also, never forget that the empty tomb has proved beyond reasonable doubt that Christ rose from the dead after suffering and dying for his or her personal sins and for the sins of all the world. His resurrection in turn proves that He is the God of all creation, for only God can conquer death. He did this for you and for me.

And that proves that all His promises and all His warnings are true and will be totally fulfilled when He comes again. Therefore, one great promise is especially fitting in conclusion. “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus |that is, openly acknowledge Jesus as your Lord|, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead |that is, that He died for all your sins and completely satisfied the terrible debt you incurred before God and thereby demonstrated the sin-debt to be completely settled by His glorious victory over death|, thou shalt be saved |that is, saved from your deserved destiny in hell and given everlasting life with Him in the new earth|” (Romans 10:9). “Blessed are all they that put their trust in him” (Psalm 2:12).

In the Infallible Word of God we read in 2 Corinthians 3:15-16 “But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart. Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away.” These verses makes it very clear why you won’t come to Christ. What is the ‘it’ ? Well since the antecedent is the word heart, the verses are saying that when the heart shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away. My friend, if you are not a believer today, don’t say it is because you have some mental reservations. The fact is that you have some sinful reservations. When the heart will turn to the Lord, then He will lift the veil. Anytime you are ready, God is ready, and He will save you. It is not God’s will that any should perish. Today it is “whosoever will may come” and “… God so love the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). All God asks you to do is believe. He doesn’t even ask you to clean up before you come to Him – He will do the cleaning.http://hopefaithprayer.com/books/Faith_+_0_=_Salvation.pdf

90Lew90

“I can say with confidence that there is no proven fact of science or history that conflicts with any statement in the Bible.”

Genesis 1-11?

Bill Huningahke

Excellent verses … Did you have something you didn’t understand ? You didn’t specify …

And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. Isn’t it awesome that we have a God that doesn’t lie and whatever He says will come to be … I like in the book of Daniel foretelling of Jesus dying for us on the cross … then you have the POWER of the Resurrection for all mankind …

MNb

“we have a God that doesn’t lie” We have a god that totally lies, because grass and trees can’t live without light and light was created according to Gen after grass and trees. We also have a Bill who lies when he writes

“You didn’t specify” because I did twice on this very page, even if Lew himself didn’t. You have become a disgrace for your own belief system; as the sinful liar you are you won’t admit it.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/ Bob Seidensticker

Bill needs to read his own fabulous holy book. 2 Chronicles 18:22 says, “So now the LORD has put a lying spirit in the mouths of these prophets of yours.”

Yep, God lies.

90Lew90

“Isn’t it awesome that we have a God that doesn’t lie and whatever He says will come to be …”

Awesome? Yeah duuude!

Actually no, I think your credulousness is pathetic. And it is you, my daft friend, who has a problem of understanding.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/ Bob Seidensticker

You a little slow? Lew was observing (for starters) that modern science rejects the Sumerian idea of a fresh water sea underneath the land and a dome of salt water overhead, which is what Genesis describes.

Another fail, and you didn’t even understand it.

MNb

“there is no proven fact of science or history that conflicts with any statement in the Bible” That’s why you neglect the examples I gave on this page – you have your headfirmly stuck in the ground. Motto: what I don’t want to see is not there.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/ Bob Seidensticker

What?! You know what Bill thinks about using arguments from elsewhere on the internet!!

Bill Huningahke

The very Irrefutable Fact of the Resurrection is so you can know that He has power even over death. The Resurrection is so man can know 100% that Christ is God – He is the Alpha and Omega – He is the King of Kings … The irrefutable fact is man has is already lost …

In the Infallible Word of God we read in 2 Corinthians 3:15-16 “But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart. Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away.” These verses makes it very clear why you won’t come to Christ. What is the ‘it’ ? Well since the antecedent is the word heart, the verses are saying that when the heart shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away.

My friend, if you are not a believer today, don’t say it is because you have some mental reservations. The fact is that you have some sinful reservations. When the heart will turn to the Lord, then He will lift the veil. Anytime you are ready, God is ready, and He will save you. It is not God’s will that any should perish. Today it is “whosoever will may come” and “… God so love the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). All God asks you to do is believe. He doesn’t even ask you to clean up before you come to Him – He will do the cleaning.

“It is not God’s will that any should perish.” As spending eternity in Heaven with people like you is as at least as much a torment as any descripition of Hell ever given and disappearing into oblivion is by far to prefer I’d rather perish indeed. If your god is as nice, kind and good as you claim he undoubtedly will grant my wish.

Pofarmer

Bill. You’re an idiot, but an earnest one. Here’s the deal. There was no original sin, there was no Adam and Eve, there was no Garden of Eden, there was no talking snake, there was no tree of knowledge. None of it, it was all an allegory, based upon other, older stories that were also allegory. So, you have Jesus, dying a metaphorical death, for an allegorical sin. The whole story is nuts, your absolute belief in your book is deluded. Open up your brain for a minute and look at the world around you. Read a couple books that might not agree with your world view. I don’t know who you are thinking you are going to convert, or reach or whatever here, but you are sad, scared, parody.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/ Bob Seidensticker

Irrefutable Fact of the Resurrection? So much for the high bar of intellectual arguments. You talk a good story, but it falls apart when put into practice.

Show us how the Resurrection is irrefutable.

You think I’m eager to become a sycophant of an egotistical tyrant? You really gotta improve your pitch.

Norm Donnan

Hey Bill,heres the verse to sum up those here, 2 Cor 4,3-4, But if the gospel is hid, it is hid to those who are lost:in whom the god of this world has blinded their mind of them who dont believe.,lest the light of the gospel of Christ ,who is the image of God should shine to them. Kind of fitting dont you think.

“Is the Bible reliable as a historical record?” No. I referred to the problems with Gen. 1 and 2 twice on this very page. And you are too dishonest or cowardly to deal with them. But I like to answer questions, even bad ones coming from creacrappers.

1. The origin of life is not a problem of Evolution Theory. Evolution begins the moment life already has appeared on Earth. The problem of the origin of life is subject of the branche of science called Abiogenesis, a crossover of biology and chemistry. So that’s a howler that only shows your ignorance.

4. “By definition it (natural selection) is a selective process (selecting from already existing information), so is not a creative process.” Evolution Theory doesn’t make that claim. It claims that unbeneficial changes of that information get weeded out and beneficial ones will acquire domination, because more offspring.

“It might explain the survival of the fittest (why certain genes benefit creatures more in certain environments), but not the arrival of the fittest” Correct. That’s what mutations are for. Note that survival of the fittest actually doesn’t apply to individuals, neither to genes, but to hereditary features.

5. Alas I’m no biochemist and think the subject uninteresting, so I can’t answer that one. Note though that pointing out that there is something we don’t know is not a refutation.

6. “how do evolutionists know that they were not designed” They don’t know. They claim that there is no evidence for design in the form of empirical data, that creatonism is incoherent, inconsistent and lacks a reliable methodology.

14. Many branches of science are partly historical and partly operational, including physics. The Big Bang is a historical event. It is derived from the very same theory as the GPS system in your car. Any creacrapper who uses it but denies the Big Bang is a hypocrite. With Evolution Theory it’s the same:

15. Begging the question. Evolution Theory is not a religion. It’s taught in biology classes of all Dutch schools, including orthodox protestant ones, simply because it’s good science. Karl Popper was wrong – and unlike any creationist he was honest enough to admit it:

I began “debating” people like you online in 2007, just before Ken Ham visited my city in 2008. At that time I hadn’t discovered quite how much your ilk would be prepared to scrape rotten wood from the bottom of a barrel full of insane claims to try to hold your position. Now, I’ve seen it all. And you’re STILL wheeling out this same shit. Pull your head out of your ass. You’re beneath contempt. And you’re a hateful little shit. Whatever was noble in the supposed message of the supposed Jesus of Nazareth, you’ve completely fucking missed. Away and wallow in your own stink.

If — *if* — there is any kind of god that really did create the universe, in all its beauty and complexity and enormity, the idea that that entity would favour people like you is just about the most… Well, let’s just say it’s a joke on a cosmic scale. And I think you’re the butt of it. Ya fucking moron.

MNb

“And you’re STILL wheeling out this same shit.” Give the guy some slack, Lew. He is a creacrapper and creacrap – whether it’s the Ken Ham variation, the IDiocy from Seattle or theistic evolution a la Plantinga and Craig – by definition is not capable of anything but eternally “wheeling out the same shit.” I’m not exactly on good terms with Jerry Coyne (he has banned me, with some justification), but this question of his is a good one: what new insights has christian theology developed last 500 years or so? And if those insights contradict each other, which method do they use to decide between them? Exactly. Now how can you expect guys like Bill to do any better?

90Lew90

I don’t. But when I see a YEC come along with this bollocks, yet again, I despair somewhat. I live in a place which is overrun with these people — not in the wider population, but in government. I could go on all day about how that affects the ‘average joe’ here. But they’re tenacious (as we know) and they’re determined (as we know) and they make a point of getting out of bed early every morning to push their fucking agenda and stoop to levels no decent, well-adjusted person would dream of stooping to in the process. As a gay man, I’ve had them in the neck a number of times. As a friend of someone trying to get an abortion I’ve run gauntlets of these people while simply trying to get to a family-planning clinic here. I’ve gone to London with that friend — because abortion, like gay marriage, is illegal here because of these people, the only place in the UK where it remains so — where I’ve run more gauntlets of the same kind of fuckers outside clinics there.

They picket Pride in Belfast every fucking year. I’ve had to have reconstructive surgery on my face — pins and plates — because the four guys who broke my fucking face were all full of Jesus when they jumped on it. I grew up with guns and bombs because this kind of people refused to see that they were part of the fuckin problem. I can listen to almost any argument but that of a fundamentalist prod, and by extension, I have little time for fundamentalist-anything arguments. I would not piss on them if they were on fire. I can’t be clearer.

MNb

You’re clear enough, Lew. Don’t worry. My request (to give him some slack) was not exactly honest. I would be disappointed if you granted it. Just another bad Dutch joke, I’m afraid.

Norm Donnan

Thats why there are no Dutch comedians Mark,humour is not a Dutch trait im afraid.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/ Bob Seidensticker

I wouldn’t want to have had the personal experiences with Christian excesses that you have. Still, it does give a lot of authority to your comments. Thanks for sharing.

Thin-ice

90Lew90: Using invective, personal attacks and gutter language is not the most effective way to make your point. Let THEM make ad hominem attacks and lose their cool. We rationalists need to make our arguments with intelligence and reason. On behalf of non-believers, I find your rage embarrassing.

90Lew90

I don’t think you can speak on behalf of non-believers my friend. And I have good reason to be angry. How does that grab you?

Thin-ice

I’m angry too. I spent 46 years in that delusion, including totally wasted years as a missionary, etc. etc. And I’m listening, in case you want to make a case that hurling personal insults is more effective than other ways of engaging. I’m not above admitting that your way might be better than my way.

Thin-ice

And I just have a more complete picture, reading about your experience in Belfast. Ironically, back in the 1970’s I even delivered Christian books to bookstores in Belfast, part of my life I regret. You have every reason to be pissed off, without a doubt.

Thin-ice

And, FYI, I volunteer regularly as a “Pro-Choice Escort” for women visiting an abortion clinic in Portland, Oregon, to protect them from the fundamentalists who come out to picket and yell at the patients as they enter.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/ Bob Seidensticker

I have a friend who does that in Seattle. You’re doing the Lord’s work.

90Lew90

Good for you (and I mean that). I’ve run that gauntlet once with a friend. I’ve never heard of any organisation taking volunteers to do it. I don’t think I could.

90Lew90

Look man. I’m just a bit too long in the tooth to accept any demand that I “be nice” when I’m dealing with utter, utter hypocrisy and quite a lot of bullshit. Maybe you’re right. Maybe to be combative is to polarise. But I have this notion that being diamond-cutter hard with these people puts them on the back foot and actually does get through. I may be wrong but I think that to be uncompromising does demonstrate to them that they’re the ones on thin ice and I don’t think it makes me a bad person to argue vigorously when they’re giving it to me in the neck.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/ Bob Seidensticker

I like the “let a thousand flowers bloom” approach. If you’re good at being a straight-shooting, no-nonsense, unpleasant jerk, be the best one you can be.

One instance comes to mind where being obnoxious can be effective. When someone makes a stupid argument, if you humiliate him publicly (like here) by pointing out the flaws, he is unlikely to admit that he made a mistake. Not here, anyway. But knowing how he got slapped about, he may well not use that argument again.

Of course, you’ve got guys like Al who are unable to change and will recycle the same arguments from their Little Book of Stupid Christian Arguments, but the thoughtful ones will improve.

90Lew90

That would be the aim and most of my rudeness is just borne of frustration that I’d prefer to thump out on a keyboard rather than doing some real-life thumping. I think that’s more civilised and you have some sort of voice. By and large I can get along with most people but there’s a sort of unwritten rule here that religion and politics are completely off-topic — it’s not the done thing to talk about them. I can see why and play along but you end up starved of conversation about things you care about, apart from with close friends who you’re in agreement with anyway, and I’d say religion and politics are pretty important things to be able to speak freely about. So when I come across as angry and frustrated, well excuse me. That’s because I am!

But yeah. I’m willing to bet that Asmondius only drops in when he thinks nobody’s looking because he’s been stung. I’d also be willing to bet that he makes nothing other than snidey little snarks because he doesn’t want to be shown up a fool. I’m under no illusion that his faith will be shaken but if he just thinks a bit more about just how daft it is and takes a look at himself then job done.

The problem the shenanigans of Asmondius or Al or Jenna is that, while they are determined to remain closed minded, most people here are observers, not participants. They don’t make the Christian position look palatable.

hector_jones

You use your way and I’ll use mine. I have no interest in proving to you through calm, rational debate that my way is better. I’ll engage with other people however I damn well please.

hector_jones

The fainting couch is to your left.

Thin-ice

As I said to 90Lew below, make your case that ad hominem insults are a more effective way of presenting atheism than a cooler, rational approach. I could be wrong, though, so tell my why . . .

Kodie

This in no way settles the debate, but I think there is room for either approach, and former Christians have come forward to say as much.

Thin-ice…some people have *escaped* that, and are rightfully angry at how they were treated.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/ Bob Seidensticker

Uh … don’t you detest people who use nothing more than recycled internet arguments? Or are the rules different for Christians?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/ Bob Seidensticker

The scientific consensus is that evolution is the best explanation for why life is the way it is. You’re a layman, I assume? How are you going to argue against the consensus view of a subject you’re not qualified to evaluate?

My Books

“Cross Examined is a great read on two fronts. You won’t find a better book on Christian apologetics and the rebuttals ... and the story is compelling, with a startling climax. Highly recommended.” — Paul Gabel, author of Inventing JesusA Modern Christmas Carol “Consistently ingenious and beautifully written ... thought-provoking!” — Dr. Robert M. Price, The Bible Geek